Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEnergy Board - Minutes - 01/12/2017Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 Fort Collins Utilities Energy Board Minutes Thursday, January 12, 2017 Energy Board Chairperson City Council Liaison Pete O’Neill, 970-223-8703 Ross Cunniff, 970-420-7398 Energy Board Vice Chairperson Staff Liaison Nick Michell, 970-215-9235 Tim McCollough, 970-305-1069 Roll Call Board Present: Chairperson Pete O’Neill, Vice Chairperson Nick Michell, Alan Braslau, Bill Becker, Greg Behm Late Arrivals: Margaret Moore, Lori Nitzel, Stacey Baumgarn Board Absent: Phil Friedman Others Present Staff: Tim McCollough, Christie Fredrickson, Adam Bromley, Lindsay Ex, Lucinda Smith, Mike Gebo; John Phelan PRPA: Paul Davis Members of the Public: Rick Cohen Meeting Convened Chairperson Pete O’Neill called the meeting to order at 5:31 p.m. Announcements and Agenda Changes None Public Comment None Approval of December 1, 2016 Board Meeting Minutes Amendments to the December 1, 2016 minutes were made by the Board Members and the minutes were accepted as amended. Staff Reports Advanced Meter Infrastructure Adam Bromley, Smart Grid & System Operation Manager (attachments available upon request) Mr. Bromley gave an overview of the Advanced Meter Fort Collins project (AMFC) and the Advanced Metering Infrastructure (AMI). The AMI system is a key piece to supporting the overall City Mission, and has helped the Utility and its customers realize significant tangible and intangible benefits, such as reduced vehicle usage to manually read meters, as well as web portal services for the customer. The AMI system is generally made up of field assets (such as meters) and IT infrastructure (fiber network backhaul, metering databases). Those two pieces support Customer-Enabling features such as the Web Portal data and Water Conservation Programs. 1 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 Automated meter-reads are inherent to the AMI system, which reduces the meter-reading workforce. Since the mass deployment of solid state electronic meters in 2013, the Utility has seen annual cost savings of $640,000 per year, or approximately $1.9 million over the last three years. Automated meter reads also reduce truck rolls, or the need to deploy a vehicle, which reduces fuel usage and associated CO2 emissions by approximately 75%. Service and read requests are now accessible through the online portal and the Utility can now gather those reads electronically. Over the last three years, more than 90% of the 26,000 move-out service orders were created through the online portal and reads were collected without sending a Utilities representative to that location. The Utility has saved approximately $360,000 per year as a result of this automated process. As part of the AMFC project, the Utility replaced the majority of the non-communicating electromechanical meters with solid state electronic meters. Compared to the electromechanical style, the solid state meters will not slow down over time, making them more accurate over the life of the meter. Accuracy testing was performed on representative samples of the electromechanical meters that were replaced during the AMFC project. The testing showed an average of 0.5% and 0.35% improvement of accuracy in residential and commercial meters, respectively, leading to the one time meter accuracy cost benefit of about $350,000. Another customer-facing service the AMI system enables is the Web Portal. Since its inception in mid- 2014, nearly 13,000 different customers have accessed the, “Monitor My Use” page to view their interval usage data for electric and/or water. Over the last six months, 809 customers have utilized the web portal on average at least once per month. Additionally, the Demand Response System has been enhanced by AMI data. Since data is collected in 15 minute intervals, it allows the Utility to better calculate how much load reduction occurred during a peak demand response event. The Utility can now accurately understand how much load is currently online and available to utilize during a demand response event, which will help future participation in Energy Markets. The Utility also has about 1,900 controllable water heaters and 1,900 thermostats enrolled in the Demand Response (Peak Partners) program. The Peak Partners program is intended shift electricity consumption during peak times by allowing the Utility to send a signal to the customer’s thermostat (or water heater) to automatically reduce energy consumption. Customers have the option to override the signal. Over the last two and a half years, there were over 268,000 logged thermostat sessions and 77% of those were completed using a mobile device. Future capabilities of the AMI system include more accurate and real time modeling of the distribution system, with more focus on high penetration of parallel generation sources. The Utility is also working on a data sharing research project with Colorado State University for advanced system modeling, where they will be able to run advanced system models for various system configurations and constraints, including high-penetration parallel generation, battery storage, and Plug-in Electric Vehicles. Additionally, the Utility has enabled expanded rate options such as Time of Use, Electric Vehicle charging rates, and bill pre-payment through the implementation of AMI. The City is also very close to implementing an automated process for remote service turn-ons when a payment has been made after hours. Vice Chairperson Michell asked if Time of Use tracking was possible with the old meters. Mr. Bromley said there was a small group of meters that did have the capability; however they still required manual reads. Mr. McCollough added that most of the meters that were in place prior to the smart readers did not have the ability to recognize time of day, so without significant investment, it wasn’t possible to implement of a time of use structure. Board member Moore asked how much it cost to install the meters and if there is a net savings at the end. Mr. McCollough said the initial cost was partially funded by a 2 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 federal grant (Smart Grid Investment Grant), and the City received about $16 million through this grant. The other $18 million was borrowed from the ratepayers, which was amortized over 10 years; there are still four years left on the debt service payments. However, the costs that Mr. Bromley discussed are roughly $1 million in hard cost-savings. Mr. McCollough explained that over time, the system will pay for itself, and ultimately this is the new way to do business in a Utility. Board member Braslau noted there had been some opposition to this project, and he wondered if those concerns are still being voiced. Mr. McCollough advised that some concerns do exist, especially pertaining to privacy, radio frequency emissions and the disconnect switches that are enabled with the meters. He elaborated that the Utility takes data privacy very seriously; he believes the Utility’s track record of protecting customer data will help build trust within the community, even though it may not be possible to eliminate that concern. Board member Becker asked if there is an opt-out option, and Mr. McCollough explained a number of opt-out options exist; customers can opt-out on the granularity of the data, meaning the Utility will only store the monthly register read, instead of the 15-minute interval recordings. Customers can also elect to have a non-communicating meter, and the Utility will manually collect meter reads for a fee of $11 per-month. Vice Chairperson Michell asked about demand response, and wondered if staff could provide a better explanation of how it could help the City in the future; he wondered if it requires the use of an Energy Market that we don’t have today? Mr. McCollough explained the way the Utility uses demand response today is to avoid the monthly coincident demand charges. By being able to measure demand reduction, the Utility knows exactly how much energy is available and, in the future, how much energy could be bid into a market. Chairperson O’Neill asked Mr. Bromley to elaborate on the data modeling project with CSU. Mr. Bromley said that CSU is using the AMI data to analyze potential system constraints that the Utility has not yet identified. Mr. McCollough said the research partnership exists due to a National Science Foundation grant. The Utility provides real data, real circuit models and solar customers. CSU blinds the data and uses it for research purposes, so they can publish studies. CSU is looking for high penetrations of solar and the impact of partial shading across a solar footprint, so Mr. McCollough believes this is a mutually beneficial partnership. 2015 Building Code and Local Amendments Overview Mike Gebo, Chief Building Official (attachments available upon request) Mr. Gebo introduced the Board to the 2015 edition of the International Codes that fall within the City’s jurisdiction. The five codes that the City adopts are: 2015 International Building Code (IBC), 2015 International Residential Code (IRC), 2015 International Mechanical Code (IMC), 2015 International Fuel Gas Code (IFGC) and the 2015 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC). The 2015 International Codes represent the most up-to-date building codes. These codes establish minimum construction standards to safeguard the public health, safety and welfare by regulating structural strength and stability, sanitation, light and ventilation, energy conservation and property protection. The codes are developed on through the International Code Council (ICC) on a three year cycle. The City is currently working under the 2012 edition and working to adopt and move forward with the 2015 edition. Mr. Gebo recognizes new codes often drive up the cost of construction, so he set up a review committee that consists of construction and trade professionals (both residential and commercial), including 3 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 engineers, contractors, designers, Poudre Fire Authority as well as Utilities and Building Services staff. The committee reviewed work from March 2016 through December 2016, evaluating changes and local amendments. The review committee voted unanimously in support for the amendments as presented. The City also has a Plan-Do-Check Act (PDCA) process; the City planned by reviewing and adopting the 2012 codes, and now they will come back to check and act by reviewing what did and didn’t work in the last local amendments. Mr. Gebo highlighted a few key changes in the IBC, IRC and Energy Codes. Some of the changes in the IBC codes included the allowance of NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) 13R fire sprinkler systems in small, multi-family buildings, requiring building-mounted light fixtures to be Dark-Sky listed, and potentially providing options for use of banned vinyl siding. IRC code changes included permit exemptions for storage sheds (as long as they are three feet from the property line), habitable lofts need to have an emergency escape window, and all new homes must be PV and EV ready. The 2012 IECC edition and amendments were considered a great improvement over the 2009 edition of the IECC, so as a result, there were no reductions in local amendments from the 2012 edition, and the edits were to provide clarity and reinforce the 2012 amendments. Mr. McCollough asked about the conduit size that would be installed in new construction homes equipped to be EV ready. Mr. Gebo advised they will recommend at least a 30 Amp/240 Volt, but he needs to do additional research on the size of the conduit. Mr. McCollough offered to assist by asking the Light & Power staff for their recommendation after the meeting. He also asked Mr. Gebo if there is any consideration put into southern exposure rooftops with regards to solar panel installation and rooftop penetrations, such as vents. Mr. Gebo said the code is intended to guide the user to find the most likely source and the most use of the panel surface, and noted these are minimum standard codes Board member Behm asked about Mr. Gebo’s definition of PV ready. Mr. Gebo said he tries to consider what the home owner would think as “PV or EV ready.” He thinks some homeowners may think that phrase implies they can just turn it on, which is not the case—it’s simply PV or EV prepped with conduit, and the homeowner will still be responsible for panels or charging station, etc. This is clearly explained within the code itself. Vice Chairperson Michell asked about the cost of the PV and EV code modifications because they may not always apply to every house. For example, Mr. Michell’s home is shaded the majority of the day, so it does not make sense for his home to be PV ready because it would not make sense to install or use PV panels. Mr. Gebo said a situation like Mr. Michell’s would be handled through a variance process; he explained that he can’t write a code for every nuance, so the code is written generically, at a minimum standard, to cover the bulk of homes. Mr. Gebo said he attempted to highlight the pertinent and key updates to the codes, and is requesting a recommendation from the Board. Chairperson O’Neill moved the Energy Board recommends adoption of the 2015 building codes with local amendments. Board member Moore seconded the motion. Board Member Behm made an amendment to correct the motion to use the language presented in the AIS, “The Energy Board recommends that City Council adopt the 2015 International Codes and local amendments.” 4 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 Vote on the Motion: It passed unanimously, 8-0, with 1 absence Statement to National & State Leaders Affirming Need for Action to Address Climate Change (attachments available upon request) Chairperson O’Neill asked Board Member Braslau to present the background information regarding the Mayors’ National Climate Action Agenda (MNCAA) letter, as well as the Paris Agreement. The Paris Agreement is an agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), which addresses greenhouse gas emissions mitigation, adaptation, and finance, beginning in the year 2020. Mr. Braslau displayed a timeline, beginning in 2015, of MNCAA letters that were drafted and sent to the current President, as well as Council and Review Committee deadlines. He identified concerns that were expressed by some members of City Council, such as appearing to be partisan, and whether or not the letter has any effect or actionable outcome. Chairperson O’Neill clarified that the objecting Council Members are not opposing the principles of the letter, because they are still solidly behind the Climate Action Plan, but rather objecting to the fact that this is a matter of National Policy, not municipal government. Lucinda Smith, Environmental Services Director with the City of Fort Collins, advised staff was charged to evaluate the Paris Agreement and look for alignment with the City’s Policies. They looked at each clause of the Paris Agreement against the Legislative Policy Agenda and the City Strategic Plan. Ms. Smith explained the staff generally found alignment between the City’s goals and the agreement; such as limiting global temperature increases and the understanding of what that would take. She said they did not find any clauses anywhere in the agreement that were in direct conflict with the City’s goals. Lindsay Ex, Environmental Program Manager with the City of Fort Collins, also noted that part of the reason this agreement is so successful is because it allows each nation to forge its own path, or a “nationally determined contribution.” Chairperson O’Neill said his concern is rooted within certain articles of the Paris agreement for which the City has no corresponding policy in place either way. If the City endorses this agreement, does it also imply that they are also endorsing items that the City hasn’t currently taken a stance on? Ms. Smith explained if anything it could introduce additional opportunities for local businesses or enterprises that want to be involved in new markets. She also noted that the City Strategic Plan encourages collaboration at not only a regional level, but also encourages seeking global partnerships. Board Member Becker commented that this is just an endorsement letter and that it is simply supporting a concept. Board members echoed his comment, agreeing there is not a commitment to action by signing the MNCAA letter. Board members debated if endorsing the agreement would constitute it as a political statement, and if taking a stance on something like this document is even within the purview of the Energy Board, since they are a municipal Board. Chairperson O’Neill argued that it is not the City’s place to comment on National Policy unless it impedes localized efforts. Chairperson O’Neill commented that the purview of the Energy Board, much like the City of Fort Collins municipal government and City Council, is local. He believes that it is not the City’s place to comment on National policy unless it impedes our efforts. He is opposed to making a recommendation to City Council because he believes Mayor Troxell’s January 3, 2017 letter to the President-Elect already clearly communicates the City’s climate change mission and values. Many Board members disagreed with Mr. O’Neill, and believe the MNCAA letter carries weight as a symbolic statement. Especially because the 5 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 City not only values its own Climate Action Plan, but also because they are a leader in Climate Change practices. Some Board members commented that by not signing the MNCAA letter, the City could be sending a message that they’re standing down from an issue that is very important to both the Board and to the City as an organization. Others also reiterated that even if a signature is purely symbolic, there is a lot of value behind the statement and it makes the City’s position on climate change clear. Board member Moore moved to write a memo to Council recommending the adoption of resolution 2017-005 MNCAA. Board member Behm seconded the motion. Vote on the Motion: It passed 7-1, with 1 absence. The board discussed the content of the memo to assist Chairperson O’Neill in drafting the memo. Mr. O’Neill will send the letter to the Board Secretary for signature and distribution to Council. Officer Elections Chairperson O’Neill explained the function and duties of the two elected officers for the Energy Board, Chairperson and Vice Chairperson. He explained that since this is the last year of his Energy Board term, he would like to continue as Chairperson. Vice Chairperson Michell also stated that he would like to retain his role as Vice Chairperson. Board members agreed that Mr. O’Neill and Mr. Michell are good fits for their respective roles. Board member Behm moved that Pete O’Neill act as Chairperson, and Nick Michell act as Vice Chairperson, until the next annual election of officers for the Energy Board. Board member Braslau seconded the motion. Vote on the Motion: It passed unanimously, 8-0, with 1 absence. Approve 2016 Energy Board Annual Report (attachments available upon request) Chairperson O’Neill advised the Annual Report is the same as the version presented at the December 1, 2016 meeting; however, he’s since added the content from the December 1, 2016 meeting. Board member Baumgarn moved to approve the 2016 Annual Report of the Energy Board, as presented. Board member Behm seconded the motion. Vote on the Motion: It passed unanimously, 8-0, with 1 absence. Adopt 2017 Energy Board Work Plan Mr. McCollough advised Council did not suggest any alterations or changes to the Energy Board’s 2017 Work Plan, so the Board now has the option to seek approval to expand their regional collaboration powers. Board member Braslau moved to adopt the 2017 work plan for the Energy Board, as presented. Vice Chairperson Michell seconded the motion. 6 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 Vote on the Motion: It passed unanimously, 8-0, with 1 absence. Board Member Reports Chairperson O’Neill had a lunch meeting with Councilman Cunniff, and Councilman Cunniff did not express any concerns related to the Board’s request to collaborate regionally—at that time, the work plan had not been approved yet by Council. Councilman Cunniff also suggested seeking clarification on the definition of “full term,” with regards to length of membership terms on the Energy Board—i.e., two terms or eight years—because some Board members have two year terms. Board member Braslau said the rebranding of the Climate Action Plan is still a debated topic, but it seems to him that the Road to 2020 is not working and he would like the Board to discuss it at a future meeting. He also said the SharePoint site is not functioning very well for him. Other Board members echoed this concern, and some said they were not able to access the site at all. Until support staff can find an alternative solution, the Board Secretary will distribute meeting materials via email. Future Agenda Review Board members inquired about Broadband. Mr. McCollough explained that after the December 20 Council Work Session, City Council and City Staff will pursue a third-party option in parallel with the municipal retail option, while also looking at ballot language for the November 2017 election. Mr. McCollough explained Broadband may or may not be in the purview of the Energy Board, depending on what direction the City decides to move. Chairperson O’Neill would like to add the renaming of Road to 2020 to the Board’s planning calendar. Mr. McCollough advised that staff is discussing Electric Capacity Fees and Time of Use. These may require a special February session to meet council deadlines. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 8:31 p.m. Approved by the Energy Board on February 9, 2017 ________________________________ ______________ Board Secretary, Christie Fredrickson Date 7 Energy Board Minutes January 12, 2017 2/10/2017